Hi,
Michael G. Schwern wrote:
> --- a/perl/Git/SVN/Utils.pm
> +++ b/perl/Git/SVN/Utils.pm
[...]
> @@ -100,6 +102,20 @@ API as a URL.
> =cut
>
> sub canonicalize_url {
> + my $url = shift;
> +
> + # The 1.7 way to do it
> + if ( defined &SVN::_Core::svn_uri_canonicalize ) {
> + return SVN::_Core::svn_uri_canonicalize($url);
> + }
> + # There wasn't a 1.6 way to do it, so we do it ourself.
> + else {
> + return _canonicalize_url_ourselves($url);
> + }
> +}
> +
> +
> +sub _canonicalize_url_ourselves {
> my ($url) = @_;
> $url =~ s#^([^:]+://[^/]*/)(.*)$#$1 . canonicalize_path($2)#e;
Leaves me a bit nervous.
What effect should we expect this change to have? Is our emulation
of svn_uri_canonicalize already perfect and this change just a little
futureproofing in case svn_uri_canonicalize gets even better, or is
this a trap waiting to happen when new callers of canonicalize_url
start relying on, e.g., %-encoding of special characters?
If I am reading Subversion r873487 correctly, in ancient times,
svn_path_canonicalize() did the appropriate tweaking for URIs. Today
its implementation is comforting:
const char *
svn_path_canonicalize(const char *path, apr_pool_t *pool)
{
if (svn_path_is_url(path))
return svn_uri_canonicalize(path, pool);
else
return svn_dirent_canonicalize(path, pool);
}
It might be easier to rely on that on pre-1.7 systems.
Thanks,
Jonathan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html